Jack Straw would like to ask you to kindly remove your face veil...

[Valenteenah.]

Straw 'opposes all Muslim veils'

Friday, 6 October 2006, 09:51 GMT 10:51 UK

BBC News

 

Cabinet Minister Jack Straw has said he would prefer Muslim women not to wear veils at all.

 

The Commons leader said he did not want to be "prescriptive" but he believed that covering people's faces could make community relations more difficult.

 

Mr Straw has said he asks Muslim women at his Blackburn constituency surgeries if they would mind removing veils.

 

Some Muslim women called his remarks insulting, but other Muslims said they understood his concerns.

 

 

Meeting strangers

 

Mr Straw is Labour MP for Blackburn, where about 30% of residents are Muslim.

 

He sparked controversy when he told his local paper he asked female constituents visiting his surgery if they would uncover their faces - something they had all so far agreed to do.

 

Asked on BBC Radio 4's Today programme if he would rather the veils be discarded completely, Mr Straw replied: "Yes. It needs to be made clear I am not talking about being prescriptive but with all the caveats, yes, I would rather."

 

Mr Straw explained the impact he thought veils could have in a society where watching facial expressions was important for contact between different people.

 

"Communities are bound together partly by informal chance relations between strangers - people being able to acknowledge each other in the street or being able pass the time of day," he said.

 

"That's made more difficult if people are wearing a veil. That's just a fact of life.

 

"I understand the concerns but I hope, however, there can be a mature debate about this.

 

"I come to this out of a profound commitment to equal rights for Muslim communities and an equal concern about adverse development about parallel communities."

 

 

'Separateness' fears

 

Mr Straw, seen as a potential candidate for Labour's deputy leadership, stressed it was a choice for women and he was making a request and not a demand.

 

"What I've been struck by when I've been talking to some of the ladies concerned is that they had not, I think, been fully aware of the potential in terms of community relations," he said.

 

"I mean, they'd thought of it just as a statement for themselves, in some cases they regard themselves as very religious - and I respect that - but as I say, I just wanted to put this issue on the table."

 

He said he was worried the "implications of separateness" and the development of "parallel communities".

 

Downing Street said Mr Straw was expressing a private opinion and Tony Blair thought it was reasonable to do so.

 

 

'Dangerous doctrine'

 

Mr Straw's comments have provoked a mixed response from Muslim groups.

 

The Islamic Human Rights Commission labelled the article "astonishing" and accused Mr Straw of discrimination.

 

The Protect-Hijab organisation said the "appalling" comments showed "a deep lack of understanding".

 

But Dr Daud Abdullah, of the Muslim Council of Britain, said he could understand Mr Straw's discomfort adding that women could choose to remove the veil.

 

Conservative policy director Oliver Letwin said it would be "dangerous doctrine" to tell people how to dress.

 

"If a person is making a statement about how they want to dress, I think it's pretty important we live in a country where you're allowed to do that," he said.

 

And Liberal Democrat president Simon Hughes accused Mr Straw of being insensitive.

 

"The experience of visiting their MP is difficult enough for many people without having to consider a dress code," said Mr Hughes.

 

Muslim Labour MP Shahid Malik applauded Mr Straw for being honest and said he was entitled to make his request as long as he respected the decision of people who refused the request.

 

Mr Malik said the remarks came on the trail of other media stories about Muslims and he appealed for calm.

 

"The problem is not necessarily what Jack is saying but the climate in which he's saying it," he said.

 

Source Link

[N.O.R.F]

They are showing us the door people and its ajar.

 

Read the have your say section on the BBC website.

[Miriam1]

What i gather is that he is talking about covering your face only when he says "veil" and not the hijab, covering of the hair and wearing loose clothes?

 

We know that covering your face is not a necessity. Right?

 

So if you consider this position, from an angle of community relations in a society where the majority of people are ignorant of Islam.

 

You must be able to see the merits of his argument.

 

How many times a day do you say hello to a neighbour or a shopkeeper that you pass by everyday, without knowing this persons name or ever having had a full conversation with them?

 

I am sure lots.

 

How are you able to do this. Simple body langauge, people see your face and read you by it.

 

You smile, they smile and all is good. People are very receptive.

 

When you can't see someones face it stops so many forms of informal communication...

 

However

 

It shouldnt have come from him. And it doesnt just sound right. even though I agree with him.

[NGONGE]

Lets not panic just yet, girls. He's got no problems with your bandanas

[Che -Guevara]

Originally posted by Hayam:

 

When you can't see someones face it stops so many forms of informal communication...

 

Do informal communications make better neighbors?

[Libaax-Sankataabte]

If that is his preference, it was expected and he has the right to speak his mind.

 

Isn't Jack Straw the FM removed by Rumsfeld because of the infamous "nuts" comment?

[Miriam1]

"Do informal communications make better neighbors?"

 

Yes. They do.

 

Very few people these days even know who thier next door neighbour is.

 

Communication between them would usually consist of a "hello+smile" nod, whenever they happen to meet in the apt hallway, or infront of thier houses.

 

And it is through this that they judge each other as being "okay" people.

 

Is this good?

 

Nope. I am sure we all would like for things to be like how they are back "home".Where everyone down the street is "family".

 

However this isnt "home".

 

So lets adapt, just a little bit.

 

 

 

Ps. I am in love with this quick reply thing.

very nice admin.

[Mowgli]

When in rome do as the romans, alhamdullilah so far we have been allowed to build mosques, muslim schools and wear our hijaabs, but like Hayam said, we should all keep in mind this isn't home.

[SeeKer]

Originally posted by NGONGE:

Lets not panic just

YET

, girls. He's got no problems with your bandanas

I was reading between the lines

 

He has the right to voice his opinion and I don't think muslims need to be jumping up and down. His reasoning is sound since it is just a personal opinion but then again wasn't the pope just using a quote? Jack holds a position of influence (I think) and therefore being the sheep that we are (all people) the ignorant among us will echo his sentiments. Maybe this is what makes one raise their eyebrows when they heard about the veil biz. As I remarked in another post, muslim countries are already banning either the influence of hijab or the hijab itself. I don't see any muslims calling for action against morrocco and tunisia, or are we that blinded that we don't see our arm is bleeding as we call attention to the wounds of the man next to us?

[ElPunto]

^I'm hearing the ruckus over his statements has yet to dissipate.

 

I think his commentary has 2 aspects. The 'correctness' of his opinion and his wisdom in expressing it.

 

In essence, Straw feels uncomfortable with veiled women and believes it to impede intergration. If he's uncomfortable with these women he should get over it. One's discomfort with pierced ppl, Rastafarians etc says more about the one expressing discomfort than the other party. As to integration - if one believes that a piece of cloth determines every aspect of one's life in a new country that is simply ignorant. Thus his 'opinion' is simply informed by his own prejudices and stereotypes and can be dismissed as baseless.

 

In a time of hieghtened tensions for the Muslim community in Britain - for Jack Straw to express these private sentiments is unwise to say the least. And then to call to ban the veil - that is simply heaping insult on insult.

 

On both counts Straw fails - one can only conjecture political posturing as the reason for his statment.

[Socod_badne]

Originally posted by ThePoint:

In a time of hieghtened tensions for the Muslim community in Britain - for Jack Straw to express these private sentiments is unwise to say the least.

Unwise you say? I tell you what's unwise. Denying non-muslim women the right to dress as they see fit in muslim majority countries. Remember the hue and cry while back in Nigeria about Miss World Pageant competition to be held there? The mere proposal to hold the event there sent thousands of muslims to the streets in protests. And here we are decrying an elected official's right to free speech. Amidst it all, we forget that this right of his to air his displeasure with Hijab (the kind that leaves bare only the eyes) is the same right that allows muslim women to wear the Hijab.

[NGONGE]

It’s more than obvious that his comments are made for political reasons. Tony is on his way out and all the big players are doing/saying things that will show what strong leaders they are.

 

Still, like Seeker said, it’s not as much of a big deal as what is taking place in supposedly Muslim lands.

 

I’ve always had a feeling that the issue of the veil was going to eventually be discussed. The recent ruckus about the banning of the Hijab in France and the school girl’s case in the UK were big indicators to this final outcome.

 

It’s not at all wrong to say that the veil hinders integration. Facial expressions are powerful tools in individual communications. How can you tell if the person you’re talking to is interested in what you say if you can’t see what their face looks like? Are they sad, happy, indifferent, bored? They eyes of course help in conveying some messages, but, so too do the lips, the nose and the facial muscles. As Muslims we accept the choice of some of our sisters to veil their faces but non-Muslims have no reason to accept such a choice. I can easily understand why they would find it uncomfortable and want to debate it (debate for now and not ban).

 

Still, no matter what the issue, I sincerely hope that our ‘spokespeople’ will finally get the hint and stop flying of the handle every time they see or hear something uncomplimentary being said about Islamic symbols (I note that the Danish issue has been brought back by the way).

[Endeavour]

When will the muslims get it, you are simply not wanted.! Remove your veil what next I wonder?

[ElPunto]

Originally posted by Socod_badne:

Unwise you say? I tell you what's unwise. Denying non-muslim women the right to dress as they see fit in muslim majority countries. Remember the hue and cry while back in Nigeria about Miss World Pageant competition to be held there? The mere proposal to hold the event there sent thousands of muslims to the streets in protests. And here we are decrying an elected official's right to free speech. Amidst it all, we forget that this

right

of his to air his displeasure with Hijab (the kind that leaves bare only the eyes) is the

same

right

that allows muslim women to wear the Hijab.

To your latter point - I didn't forget anything. I never said Jack Straw has no right to voice his opinion. I said his opinion was meritless in the wake of facts and that it was unwise given the hieghtened tensions. Particularly as all women that he asked to remove their veils did so thus reducing his discomfort. Then he has the gall to complain about it in public. Opinions that have little basis in facts are much like hot air - easily dimissed. But I never said Mr. Straw wasn't entitled to voicing his opinion. And I hope you will acknowledge my right to dismiss it.

 

Now to your former point. There are only 2 countries in the Muslim world, Saudi Arabia and Iran, that enforce a particular dress code on non-Muslims. For the rest - you can wear what you like( I hear the topless beaches of Tunisia and Morrocco rival any found in the south of France). If somehow - Saudi/Iran encompasses for you the entire Muslim world, then you're sadly mistaken. Secondly, the riots that occurred in Nigeria were, I believe, in response to the quote by a journalist to the effect that the Prophet would've chosen one of the contestants for a bride. The rioting etc was less in reponse to the scantily clad ladies and more to that percieved insult since the ladies had been in town for a while before anything happened. Third, I hold Britain to its self proclaimed standards - the home of Magna Carta, Parliamentary democracy, Habeus Corpus - and not to the standards of Saudi Arabia or Iran. Niether of which proclaim themselves as multicultural success stories. Why would you compare apples and oranges? This device is mostly a red herring. Let us compare the actions of senior British MP to the values he proclaims for his party and country rather than say Iran's mullahs.

 

I wonder what the reaction would've been if Jack Straw had said that he felt uncomfortable with flamboyantly, effeiminate men and wished they would act more like the 'mainstream'. I wonder whether his 'discomfort' would have been allowed such wide latitude.

[Ms DD]

Many non-muslims in the west tell us that they respect liberty and they don't want to challenge freedom of expression (a privilage we dont enjoy in the muslim countries as i am often reminded by them). So why are we having this conversation? Critise or disagree all you like but defend the rights for the muslim women to wear what she likes (Voltaire style)..Isnt this the oft-repeated statement we come to hear from the non-muslims?

 

Look deep into diversity and different cultures in the UK, how many styles and dresses will you find not in conformity with the non-muslim "rationale."

 

Should we then introduce a unique style for all? The fact is the West which takes such pride in "freedom of expression" for all, now seems to be repenting and losing its "tolerance." Some people in the West think they have the right to do everything but are not prepared to see others enjoying the same free well.